"What is a church painting on the campus of a public university?" Asks a young protester in the American film God is not dead: a light in the darkness. The young activist refers to a Lutheran-based Christian evangelical congregation, and to an American university in the state of Arkansas funded with state funds, but the memory is strong (or fragile, depending on how you look at it), and the mind immediately goes to the Complutense of Madrid and the acts of protest that brought to trial the current councilor of the city council of the capital Rita Maestre, after his assault on the Catholic chapel of the Spanish university institution.
GOD IS NOT DEAD: A LIGHT IN THE DARKNESS
Address: Mike Mason
Interpreters: David A. R. White, John Corbett, Samantha Boscarino, Bill Birch.
Gender: drama. USA, 2018.
Duration: 105 minutes.
It's just one of the very interesting issues (socially and politically, almost never in the film) raised by the film directed by Mike Mason and produced by the company of David R. White, its leading actor: Flix Entertainment, specialized in stories of evangelizing court. With a well-made 1990s telefilm look and obvious proselytizing intentions, the film goes to a theme in vogue: a certain persecution complex on the part of the American Christian church. In fact, the story begins, surprisingly, with the arrest of the protagonist pastor because of his sermons, and is built from a house of cards that does not stand: an alleged attack on the campus temple, resulting in death of a person, that is not more than a cluster of improbable coincidences that only serve to their authors to proclaim the word of God.
Although the most curious, and positive, of the film, third installment of the saga of independent stories God is not dead (The first two did not arrive in Spain), is that it is well posed in the dramatic, and even in the propaganda. In the script are a good part of the essential questions of Christianity: faith, remorse, anger, piety, confession and redemption. It develops almost in the form of a biblical parable, certainly tricky, but at the same time simple. And although the sermon is also manifest, it delves into the curious film subgenre that we usually call "convincing the convinced" with relatively new weapons: offering in their dialogues and actions defenses of strength and quality to the characters far from the faith, to atheists . And in that sense it is more skillful, in its ostensibly conservative variant, than certain profoundly progressive film products, brought to the pamphlet and Manichaeism despite their praiseworthy social purposes.
Of course, presenting their church characters as people without money and without influence is a fallacy, starting with the very existence of the film.